By looking to the relayed facts, the issue that rose in this written opinion is the matters that

should be considered by the Gombak Land Administrator in determining the quantum of

compensation.
The principles that have to be applied in assessing compensation are those laid down
in the First Scheduleto the 1960 act
1
and as decided by court in previous cases. However so,
it is important to note that the right to compensation was protected in the Federal
Constitution, Article 13 wherein the compensation
2
for compulsory acquisition or use of
property must adequately be given. The First Schedule to the 1960 act would be the keeper
of the Art 13 as it safeguards the persons who had interest to that land to be compensated
adequately. The 1960 Act makes provisions in the First Schedule for certain matters that
Land Administrator should consider it priority and what is not.
Under the First Schedule, the first
3
matter that should be considered is the market
value of the land acquired. This brought up the matter on how market value should be
ascertained. The First Schedule provides the reference date of market value as of when 12
months after
4
the Declaration under s 8 and in other
5
cases, at date of publication in s 8. It
also outlined
6
the any suitable method as a way on valuating the acquired land. The term
may referred to as the prices paid for recent sales of land with similar characteristics as the
scheduled land within same vicinity, particularly the last transaction within two years of the
reference date.

1
Land Acquisition Act, 1960.
2
Federal Constitution 2009 art 13(2).
3
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1.
4
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(1)(a).
5
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(1)(b).
6
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(1A).
The First Schedule also considers other matters that regard as market value. For such,
market value of part
7
of land acquired can be in price of market value of whole land after
considering features of that part. While for the leasehold
8
property, the market value may be
assessed by referring to the length of the expiry of the lease land but not on any subsequent
alienation. The implied or express condition
9
restricting the use of the land can also be used
in assessing compensation. In addition, the status
10
of Malay Reservation land, Malay holding
and customary land shall not be considered. The specific use of the land as indicated
11
in the
Development Plan prepared by town planning authority must also be considered by the Land
Administrator when assessing compensation. Last but not least, the reinstatement
12
principle
can be applied for instance if the land presently used for other than general demand of the
purpose market, the assessment must be on basis of reasonable cost to the proprietor of using
or purchasing other land for the same purpose.
Other than that, market value was defined in Nanyang Manufacturing Co. V CLR
Johor
13
as the price that an owner willingly to sell at that value. Moreover, the Federal Court
in Ng Tiou Hong v CLR Gombak
14
observed that Market value means the compensation
must be determined to the expected price by the willing vendor. Market price can be
measured by considering the price of similar land and locality. More than that, its
potentialities
15
must be taken into account. The use of the land and its future development
potential may affect the assessment of compensation. Apart from that, the location of the land

7
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(1B).
8
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(1D).
9
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(2)(a).
10
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(2A).
11
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(2BA).
12
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1(2C).
13
Nanyang Manufacturing Co. v The Collector of Land Revenue, Johore[1954] 69 MLJ (HC).
14
Ng Tiou Hong v Collector of Land Revenue, Gombak [1984] 2 MLJ 35 (FC ).
15
See Bukit Rajah Rubber Co Ltd v Collector of Land Revenue, Klang [1968] 1 MLJ 176 (HC) where Raja Azlan
Shah pointed out that the land must be valued not only with reference to its condition at the time of acquisition
but also with reference to its potential development value.
for examples near to the access road or developed town may be the other factors of the
assessment. The assessment also may follow the estimated value made by the experts.
To the contrary, Syed Aqil Barakbah asserted that the assessment of the
compensation must disregard the unwillingness or sentimental value on the part of the vendor
to part with the land and the urgent necessity of the purchaser to buy the land.
The First Schedule outlined six matters
16
that should be considered in determining
the compensation. Firstly, the market value
17
as determined in this schedule
18
. Secondly, the
person who had interest
19
that likely to accrue from the use to which the land acquired will be
put. Thirdly, the person interested will be compensated when damage happened by reason of
severing such land
20
from his land. Other than that, the interested persons other property of
which the damage happened due to acquisition injurious affecting
21
his other property.
Moreover, due to acquisition of the land, person who compelled or likely to compel
22
must
also be considered. Last but not least, the undertaking
23
on the part of the land acquired
would benefiting
24
the part of the land not acquired will be other matters need to be
considered by the land Administrator.
To see the application of the schedule, we may refer to the case CLR v Looi Lam
25

wherein the government acquired part of the respondents land to change the course of
Sungai Benus that passed through Kampung Bahru. As a result of the river deviation work
done by the government, after the acquisition, the house belonging to the respondent was

16
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 2
17
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 2(a)
18
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 1
19
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 2(b)
20
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 2(c)
21
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 2(d)
22
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 2(e)
23
roads, drains, wall, fences and etc
24
Land Acquisition Act 1960, First Schedule, s 2(f)
25
Collector of Land Revenue v Looi Lam [1981 ] 1 MLJ 300 (FC)
badly damaged and required extensive repair but no compensation was paid in the award for
damage to the house. The court then awarded a further RM 8101.00 as compensation for
severance damage and a further RM 40 185 as compensation for the damage of the house due
to injurious affection during acquisition of the part of the land acquired.
Based on the case above, the claim for compensation was allowed by the court as it
referred to para 2(d) of First Schedule for which the compensation will be incurred for any
damage sustained or likely to sustain due to acquisition injurious affecting his other property
whether movable or not.
Another application of the law can be seen in the case of Consolidated Plantation
Bhd v Pemungut Hasil Tanah Kelang
26
. In this case, the government acquired a portion of
the land belonging to the appellant company for a housing scheme. During enquiry, the
appellant company asked for the total compensation for value of land, diminished value of
the land not acquired, accommodation, loss of water supply with closing down of mill and
surveyors fee. The collector only award on market value and nothing else. The court granted
the compensation on 3 wishes
27
out of 5 as there was no dispute as to the injurious affect of
the acquisition on the Appellants oil palm mill as they lost part of the catchment area for
their water.
To conclude the writing, Gombak Land Administrator must understand that their duty
is not merely administrative but also quasi-judicial
28
in nature. That duty
29
clarifies the need
to make compensation which he may deem appropriate only after he acknowledged the
materials relevant to the assessment of the amount of compensation.

26
Consolidated Plantation Bhd v Pemungut Hasil Tanah, Kelang [1984] 1 MLJ 273 (COA )
27
Diminished value of land not acquired, loss of water supply with consequential closing down of the mill and
the surveyors fee
28
Pemungut Hasil Tanah, Daerah Barat Daya (Balik Pulau), Pulau Pinang v Kam Gin Paik & Ors [1983] 2 MLJ 390
(FC )
29
Land Acquisition Act 1960, s 12(1)